He definitely is a visual person like an artist is. He sees features and writes what his brain tells him. Sherilyn went in back then and didn't match the photo he had of her (In person she was her natural dark hair. His photo was her with pixie cut bleached hair). But she said he told her she reminded him of his elem school crush and wrote Audrey into the pilot.
It sounds like Lynch does some kind of estimate on how well he can work with a person in getting the movie done. He finds a correct person to channel his vision and that may be reason why he is generally well-liked by actors. Actor knows that David knows what he is doing and what is needed from them. That is why he has cast washouts and unknowns to prominent roles in his work - those people have what Lynch needs in that film and he has patience and skill to coax it out. In visual sense Lynch knows how to make bleak landscapes bleak and beautiful imagery even more beautiful. He is one of Greats.
Yeah when he cast val Kilmer in batman every one laughed, but then when he cast john Travolta in reservoir casino it was universally praised. He transcends universes
Whatever eccentric methods he has for choosing actors or sets etc. the results speak for themselves in the amazing movies he’s made for over forty years.
This is interesting to me. His auditioning process is... strange... for lack of a better term. Non-traditional. But... you can't argue results. Whether big names on the cast, or small, he pulls fantastic performances out of his actors. And his actors rave about working with him, even if they also admit that they really don't fully understand what he's doing until they see the finished film for themselves. He's weird, he's cryptic, he doesn't work at all like most film makers... but you just can't argue with his results. At the same time, I can imagine the hell 'normal' studios had working with him... most of Hollywood can't understand this man. Can you imagine him trying to describe how he wanted to cast to Dino? DeLaurentis really couldn't possibly understand what Lynch was doing (or wanting to do). It must have been maddening for them to work with Lynch if they didn't understand him. Dune would have been a far superior film if the producers just left him alone and free to be Lynch. Yes, it would have ended up even longer. Yes, it would have gone even further over budget and past schedule... but if they didn't interfere, we could have had a scifi film for the ages. Lynch does better work when he's allowed to be Lynch and embrace his strangeness. My theory as to why is he is so odd as a filmmaker is that he slipped into film through an odd side door. A path few took to the director's chair. Lynch was an ARTIST, a painter (I happen to think a damned good one, but his paintings, like his films, aren't for all tastes) . Still is. He's chasing imagery. He got into film when he started to perceive the medium as being like a painting that moves. He's not out of the Tarantino 'film buff' school of absorbing and dissecting huge amounts of movies and influences... he paints with film. So I believe he is coming at film making from a totally different place. So hearing him describe this... I think he has an image in his mind... moving and with sound, characters, plot... but not unlike a still image he'd paint. And he's looking at something else entirely when casting... do they fall into and add to that image he has in his mind? Reading lines from the script doesn't help him know that. So his method works better for the 'image chasing' that I think is the core of his work. Just my $0.02 opinion. If nothing else, we can agree that Lynch is interesting. You could hate his films, you still have to admit they're interesting.
From working with many directors, I can tell you SO MANY rely on accurate headshots more than a monologue. Choosing your actors is listening to intuition. Most of the time, the director knows if the resume is going into the yay or nay pile before an actor opens their mouth. It's a VERY visual business. Lynch is just the first person to openly talk about it this way. Sure a badly delivered monologue can ruin your chance, and a great performance can make up for a terrible photo or even halfass appearance. The point is, most people in general regardless of even industry, relies on their initial feelings and seeing a match. It's kind of common sense. I just think people see him as weird because there's no cattle call audition, which is a bit more efficient and time conscious. I like his way better.
One could even call him an artist. The process of artistry may be slow, confusing or even outright messy, but as you've said... you can't argue with the results.
I worked with a stage director who never auditioned people. He'd hold auditions and call people back like normal but just talk to them for 2 minutes and MAYBE depending on the role ask them to do a short monologue/reading. I get Lynch because I understand people who are visual and trust that more.
it makes sense since he cares a lot more about letting people have their own interpretations. So his "audition" process is him seeing if they will be efficient coworkers who can be comfortable with each other.
He picked the guy to be Bob on Twin Peaks from an accident. The sound guy got in the frame of the video with his head poking above the bed and he liked it so he made him Bob (the guy who possesses people and makes them kill.) If he was a comedian he would be Robin Williams if he was a painter he would have been Jackson Pollock . Some people just really like to improvise and work from flow of thought and dislike a lot of structure. I do not think either way is right or wrong they are just both different artistic methods. David Lynch has always liked abstract chaotic type of themes He sure did hate Dune a lot lol, one interesting thing about Dune is that the original film with a different director, Alejandro Jodorowsky was going to use the artwork of HR Giger. H R Giger did some concept art for the film and when the project changed hands they no longer wanted to use the concept art or HR Giger. Some of the art that he did for Dune was later used for Alien,so the Alien movies really owe a lot to the failed original Dune movie and were really the perfect setting for HR Giger's biomechanical type of art.
It´s not just what you know but definitely WHO you know. Being "discovered purely by chance´ is extremely rare - there is always a short-cut, expressway through the experimental improbability
What are you talking about? Do you even know the definition of nepotism? It’s defined as: “the practice among those with power or influence of favoring relatives or friends, especially by giving them jobs“. The son of Lynch’s assistant had previously worked with her on a separate project and that’s how her name was brought up. They are in no way related nor were they friends at that point. The only connection was that of Lynch and his assistant (a business relationship, not a personal one) and the assistant’s son and Watts (again a business relationship as they had previously worked together). Lynch very easily could have just ignored their suggestion but given that was already interested in her as an actress, it came from talking to and reading her to see if she was right for the part.
Key words "favouring friends". Nepotism doesn't have to be constrained to your immediate family. Name one Namoi Watts film prior to Mulholland Drive - she came straight from Australia television; the role slingshot her into Hollywood. And if you bothered to watch other interviews where Lynch speaks on casting, you would've known Watts didn't even read for the part. Lynch based his selection "purely on her looks". He saw a headshot of her, and when he met her in person - he asked her to quote "put on some make up". Hard to believe for his most successful film he picked some random actress - there had to be some intervention to get her the role.
@@UploadN0ob Well, you should be little more open - minded. Lynch is an true artist and he sees his movies as pictures/ideas. I think his judgement is not based on "bussiness/recommendations/nepotism", he just has to see "it" on his actors. Look at the video with Kyle Machlaclan talking about his first meeting with Mr. Lynch and then come back again :)
Thanks Julius, I've seen it. His films are brilliant, no doubt, but I believe Lynch sees his actors as tools to tell a story, and doesn't exactly worry too much about their skill. When I made my "nepotism" comment, it was not a shot at Lynch's or Watt's ability; simply because I believe anyone could've played the role. I mean look at the extras, and reoccurring actors across all his tv/film career. They are not particularly famous or talented, but they fulfil their role as a pawn in Lynch's grand scheme. Lynch speaks about writing the film's story as he goes, ergo Watt's only significant was the very impetus of her playing the role - which could've well been achieved through Nepotism.
That's exactly the issue with auditioning I've had. Sometimes I've had exactly the opposite tone of what they wanted while reading just a small snippet with no context and it totally messes up your impression on that person.
From working with many directors, I can tell you SO MANY rely on accurate headshots more than a monologue. Choosing your actors is listening to intuition. Most of the time, the director knows if the resume is going into the yay or nay pile before an actor opens their mouth. It's a VERY visual business. Lynch is just the first person to openly talk about it this way.
When David Lynch discussed turning down Return of the Jedi, there was a similar vibe. He didn't turn it down only because of the script. He has a holistic approach to a project. th-cam.com/video/EJQ4vCu-S0U/w-d-xo.html
I know there ain't two drops the same in that California rain. And I know it's a shame there ain't more California rain. But I think that PSA last night was a dark cloud over my happy place. It was nice to have my morning coffee to turn to.
Well, I guess some amateur would say that "Alright, Im gonna follow this process" but for me every director has its process to know actors. There's not correct process, it's more like experience with some tips from others or not. Me personally, in the circumstances of choosing carefully but faster in pre production while being in film school, I wouldn't follow this. Lynch mostly, or EVEN for Mulholland Drive, he has money, the production has money and time, so they take it on their own (except in Eraserhead, I guess there the process was different), but a film student doesn't have that much money and time, so casting has to be different
I can see a lot of Henry from Eraserhead in Mr. Lynch. He almost sounds like him too.. like his friend Jack Nance. Was Nance just doing an impression of Mr. Lynch in the film?
I interpret this as looking for signs of intelligence. Can they hold a conversation? Can they discuss a film through to the end? Considering most of Hollywood picks based on looks or connections, some of Hollywood has historically picked based on the casting couch, and much of Hollywood lacks decent scripts or filmmaking vision to make doing a reading very meaningful anyway, it isn't a bad approach.
moral of the story it's all who you know. if Naomi watts didn't work with Lynch's assistants son she wouldn't have got the role. she stinks in Mulholland Drive anyway and it's a terrible movie! just kidding it's my favorite movie of all time and Lynch's intuition due to loving his craft passionately led his decision. 💗😊
He is likely an extraordinarily visual thinker. Some think mostly in words, some in visuals. According to some other interviews, he actually created blue velvet out of a single frame he envisioned. Basically, he visualizes things, and then translates them to others. Seems to be why he always appears to be translating, as if English is a second language. Obviously it's not, but....visuals are his primary language
In some parts of Mulholland Drive, her character is wearing little to no makeup. In other parts, she is wearing makeup. It has nothing to do with her looking bad without makeup.
He's saying you should not just judge in traditional first impressions you might meet them on a bad day when they are tired or ill and miss out on potential. If she will have makeup in the film she should be able to have makeup for the audition that's just a cosmetic issue not related to talent.
Among some of the most inconceivable things about Hollywood are 1) How does Nathalie Portman have an Oscar 2) Why does Adam Sandler keep getting huge deals to make horrible “comedies” and 3) Why is David Lynch considered a good film maker
1 & 3 are subjective. 2 is simple; Adam Sandler movies always make a huge profit. Remember, it’s show BUSINESS! Btw, I don’t like Sandler’s movies either but if I was a studio executive I would LOVE them lol
I never understand why people like Mulhalland Drive. The failed TV pilot scenes are so disjoint from the patches that he shot to make the final product. It just doesn't feel like something that was designed from the beginning, only hacked together to salvage some failed footage.
It’s pretty enjoyable as an atmospheric film but it’s becomes even more enjoyable once it clicks. The movie is a dream so naturally u just go along with it like as if ur actually dreaming. Then the second time you watching u think what it all means like what we all do when we think back to the dream and why this symbolism is here and there and it’s about a failed actress trying to figure out the many multiple reasons why she didn’t make it Hollywood. The possibility being a more attractive actress slept with the director, the director was having a bad day cuz his wife cheated on him thus ruining his directing performance, an assassin killed the screenwriter, a humanoid cowboy is controlling Hollywood, an old director zoned out to her awesome audition (or in point of view she think she had an awesome audition performance), etc. the possibilities are endless. I think Christopher Nolan’s Tenet forces us to watch in this specific way as well but instead of a nightmare dream it’s time inversion.
![ILLSLICK - KILLSHOT REMIX [FULL VERSION]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RIK8RrqIAzE/mqdefault.jpg)
this is the girl
this is the chair
This is the water.
And this is the well.
Drink full and descend.
The horse is the white of the eyes and dark within.
gotta light?
He definitely is a visual person like an artist is. He sees features and writes what his brain tells him.
Sherilyn went in back then and didn't match the photo he had of her (In person she was her natural dark hair. His photo was her with pixie cut bleached hair). But she said he told her she reminded him of his elem school crush and wrote Audrey into the pilot.
It sounds like Lynch does some kind of estimate on how well he can work with a person in getting the movie done. He finds a correct person to channel his vision and that may be reason why he is generally well-liked by actors. Actor knows that David knows what he is doing and what is needed from them. That is why he has cast washouts and unknowns to prominent roles in his work - those people have what Lynch needs in that film and he has patience and skill to coax it out.
In visual sense Lynch knows how to make bleak landscapes bleak and beautiful imagery even more beautiful. He is one of Greats.
Yeah when he cast val Kilmer in batman every one laughed, but then when he cast john Travolta in reservoir casino it was universally praised. He transcends universes
He looks so proud at that very last part of this video "the rest is history."
Looked uncertain to me.
Whatever eccentric methods he has for choosing actors or sets etc. the results speak for themselves in the amazing movies he’s made for over forty years.
*question
*lynch
Closes his eyes shut and goes
This is interesting to me. His auditioning process is... strange... for lack of a better term. Non-traditional. But... you can't argue results. Whether big names on the cast, or small, he pulls fantastic performances out of his actors. And his actors rave about working with him, even if they also admit that they really don't fully understand what he's doing until they see the finished film for themselves. He's weird, he's cryptic, he doesn't work at all like most film makers... but you just can't argue with his results.
At the same time, I can imagine the hell 'normal' studios had working with him... most of Hollywood can't understand this man. Can you imagine him trying to describe how he wanted to cast to Dino? DeLaurentis really couldn't possibly understand what Lynch was doing (or wanting to do). It must have been maddening for them to work with Lynch if they didn't understand him.
Dune would have been a far superior film if the producers just left him alone and free to be Lynch. Yes, it would have ended up even longer. Yes, it would have gone even further over budget and past schedule... but if they didn't interfere, we could have had a scifi film for the ages. Lynch does better work when he's allowed to be Lynch and embrace his strangeness.
My theory as to why is he is so odd as a filmmaker is that he slipped into film through an odd side door. A path few took to the director's chair. Lynch was an ARTIST, a painter (I happen to think a damned good one, but his paintings, like his films, aren't for all tastes) . Still is. He's chasing imagery. He got into film when he started to perceive the medium as being like a painting that moves. He's not out of the Tarantino 'film buff' school of absorbing and dissecting huge amounts of movies and influences... he paints with film. So I believe he is coming at film making from a totally different place.
So hearing him describe this... I think he has an image in his mind... moving and with sound, characters, plot... but not unlike a still image he'd paint. And he's looking at something else entirely when casting... do they fall into and add to that image he has in his mind? Reading lines from the script doesn't help him know that. So his method works better for the 'image chasing' that I think is the core of his work.
Just my $0.02 opinion. If nothing else, we can agree that Lynch is interesting. You could hate his films, you still have to admit they're interesting.
voodoochild1975az One of the greatest filmmakers of all time!
From working with many directors, I can tell you SO MANY rely on accurate headshots more than a monologue. Choosing your actors is listening to intuition. Most of the time, the director knows if the resume is going into the yay or nay pile before an actor opens their mouth. It's a VERY visual business. Lynch is just the first person to openly talk about it this way. Sure a badly delivered monologue can ruin your chance, and a great performance can make up for a terrible photo or even halfass appearance.
The point is, most people in general regardless of even industry, relies on their initial feelings and seeing a match. It's kind of common sense. I just think people see him as weird because there's no cattle call audition, which is a bit more efficient and time conscious. I like his way better.
Voodoochild, well said. I've always thought that of Lynch also. Those are some good observations.
To me it sounds like he is a very relational director who knows everything his characters are thinking and feeling, which is really cool
One could even call him an artist. The process of artistry may be slow, confusing or even outright messy, but as you've said... you can't argue with the results.
that's amazing, to cast someone without having them do readings. but i can kind of see this.
I worked with a stage director who never auditioned people. He'd hold auditions and call people back like normal but just talk to them for 2 minutes and MAYBE depending on the role ask them to do a short monologue/reading.
I get Lynch because I understand people who are visual and trust that more.
it makes sense since he cares a lot more about letting people have their own interpretations. So his "audition" process is him seeing if they will be efficient coworkers who can be comfortable with each other.
He picked the guy to be Bob on Twin Peaks from an accident. The sound guy got in the frame of the video with his head poking above the bed and he liked it so he made him Bob (the guy who possesses people and makes them kill.) If he was a comedian he would be Robin Williams if he was a painter he would have been Jackson Pollock . Some people just really like to improvise and work from flow of thought and dislike a lot of structure. I do not think either way is right or wrong they are just both different artistic methods. David Lynch has always liked abstract chaotic type of themes
He sure did hate Dune a lot lol, one interesting thing about Dune is that the original film with a different director, Alejandro Jodorowsky was going to use the artwork of HR Giger. H R Giger did some concept art for the film and when the project changed hands they no longer wanted to use the concept art or HR Giger. Some of the art that he did for Dune was later used for Alien,so the Alien movies really owe a lot to the failed original Dune movie and were really the perfect setting for HR Giger's biomechanical type of art.
I can’t wait to hear Lynch’s views on the new version of Dune that’s coming out.
He is a painter.
Also H.R. Giger did art for Alejandro Jodorowski's dune that never was, don't think he was involved with Lynch's version.
I love the way he talks.
It's SUCH a good film.
It gets better and better.
The rest is SILENCIO
It´s not just what you know but definitely WHO you know. Being "discovered purely by chance´ is extremely rare - there is always a short-cut, expressway through the experimental improbability
it happens but yes its rare especially in the last 20 years.
This lends some more gravity to the reading scene in the movie - like the scene was antithetical to how he conducts himself.
What a genius
I love this man so much
What a legend
Unique take. Very smart addition style.
audition*
The point of all of this is: BE YOURSELF.
He closes his eyes to think.
Summary : INTUITION
Summary: Nepotism
What are you talking about? Do you even know the definition of nepotism? It’s defined as: “the practice among those with power or influence of favoring relatives or friends, especially by giving them jobs“. The son of Lynch’s assistant had previously worked with her on a separate project and that’s how her name was brought up. They are in no way related nor were they friends at that point. The only connection was that of Lynch and his assistant (a business relationship, not a personal one) and the assistant’s son and Watts (again a business relationship as they had previously worked together). Lynch very easily could have just ignored their suggestion but given that was already interested in her as an actress, it came from talking to and reading her to see if she was right for the part.
Key words "favouring friends". Nepotism doesn't have to be constrained to your immediate family. Name one Namoi Watts film prior to Mulholland Drive - she came straight from Australia television; the role slingshot her into Hollywood. And if you bothered to watch other interviews where Lynch speaks on casting, you would've known Watts didn't even read for the part. Lynch based his selection "purely on her looks". He saw a headshot of her, and when he met her in person - he asked her to quote "put on some make up". Hard to believe for his most successful film he picked some random actress - there had to be some intervention to get her the role.
@@UploadN0ob Well, you should be little more open - minded. Lynch is an true artist and he sees his movies as pictures/ideas. I think his judgement is not based on "bussiness/recommendations/nepotism", he just has to see "it" on his actors. Look at the video with Kyle Machlaclan talking about his first meeting with Mr. Lynch and then come back again :)
Thanks Julius, I've seen it. His films are brilliant, no doubt, but I believe Lynch sees his actors as tools to tell a story, and doesn't exactly worry too much about their skill. When I made my "nepotism" comment, it was not a shot at Lynch's or Watt's ability; simply because I believe anyone could've played the role. I mean look at the extras, and reoccurring actors across all his tv/film career. They are not particularly famous or talented, but they fulfil their role as a pawn in Lynch's grand scheme. Lynch speaks about writing the film's story as he goes, ergo Watt's only significant was the very impetus of her playing the role - which could've well been achieved through Nepotism.
That's exactly the issue with auditioning I've had. Sometimes I've had exactly the opposite tone of what they wanted while reading just a small snippet with no context and it totally messes up your impression on that person.
From working with many directors, I can tell you SO MANY rely on accurate headshots more than a monologue. Choosing your actors is listening to intuition. Most of the time, the director knows if the resume is going into the yay or nay pile before an actor opens their mouth. It's a VERY visual business. Lynch is just the first person to openly talk about it this way.
When David Lynch discussed turning down Return of the Jedi, there was a similar vibe. He didn't turn it down only because of the script. He has a holistic approach to a project.
th-cam.com/video/EJQ4vCu-S0U/w-d-xo.html
So he makes decisions based on a person’s essence.
I hope it happened the same with Kyle after Dune... his casting skills are incredible.
I know there ain't two drops the same in that California rain. And I know it's a shame there ain't more California rain. But I think that PSA last night was a dark cloud over my happy place. It was nice to have my morning coffee to turn to.
THIS is how you do it.
Well, I guess some amateur would say that "Alright, Im gonna follow this process" but for me every director has its process to know actors. There's not correct process, it's more like experience with some tips from others or not.
Me personally, in the circumstances of choosing carefully but faster in pre production while being in film school, I wouldn't follow this. Lynch mostly, or EVEN for Mulholland Drive, he has money, the production has money and time, so they take it on their own (except in Eraserhead, I guess there the process was different), but a film student doesn't have that much money and time, so casting has to be different
I can see a lot of Henry from Eraserhead in Mr. Lynch. He almost sounds like him too.. like his friend Jack Nance. Was Nance just doing an impression of Mr. Lynch in the film?
Pretty sure lynch has said before he wrote himself in that film you’re spot on!
Michael Ailwood taught Naomi to act in front of a cine camera.
Amazing!!
2:13 that was hilarious. 😂
Mr Coolest
I interpret this as looking for signs of intelligence. Can they hold a conversation? Can they discuss a film through to the end?
Considering most of Hollywood picks based on looks or connections, some of Hollywood has historically picked based on the casting couch, and much of Hollywood lacks decent scripts or filmmaking vision to make doing a reading very meaningful anyway, it isn't a bad approach.
Hwhy
They are trained actors you know.
🤣
moral of the story it's all who you know. if Naomi watts didn't work with Lynch's assistants son she wouldn't have got the role. she stinks in Mulholland Drive anyway and it's a terrible movie!
just kidding it's my favorite movie of all time and Lynch's intuition due to loving his craft passionately led his decision. 💗😊
I think the original concept of Audrey being in it would've been amazing.
Hahahaha! I had a panic moment that you were serious!
Why were his eyes closed for the first 30 seconds of his answer?
he was meditating
He is likely an extraordinarily visual thinker. Some think mostly in words, some in visuals. According to some other interviews, he actually created blue velvet out of a single frame he envisioned. Basically, he visualizes things, and then translates them to others. Seems to be why he always appears to be translating, as if English is a second language. Obviously it's not, but....visuals are his primary language
She knew a relative of his.
Jackpot.
She knew a relative of his assistant, got relaxed in his presence and was observed by Lynch.
!!!!!!!!!!!
Script baby?
Ridiculous. It's like saying "I saw something in DeNiro so I didn't have him read".
I love that he's talking about intuition. I hate that he implied Naomi Watts didn't look good enough without makeup. Oh Lynch.
In some parts of Mulholland Drive, her character is wearing little to no makeup. In other parts, she is wearing makeup. It has nothing to do with her looking bad without makeup.
a big part of the film is about vanity and voyeurism in showbusiness
I think he wanted to see her not looking drawn from a flight. I think he said that as a joke since she rushed to their meeting. I got him.
He's saying you should not just judge in traditional first impressions you might meet them on a bad day when they are tired or ill and miss out on potential. If she will have makeup in the film she should be able to have makeup for the audition that's just a cosmetic issue not related to talent.
shut up
He does not audition, he just has meetings with women he likes the look of.
Where have we heard that before ?
Among some of the most inconceivable things about Hollywood are 1) How does Nathalie Portman have an Oscar 2) Why does Adam Sandler keep getting huge deals to make horrible “comedies” and 3) Why is David Lynch considered a good film maker
Because you don't like them, simple!
Answer to all: because people generally have different opinions to you
1 & 3 are subjective. 2 is simple; Adam Sandler movies always make a huge profit. Remember, it’s show BUSINESS! Btw, I don’t like Sandler’s movies either but if I was a studio executive I would LOVE them lol
I never understand why people like Mulhalland Drive. The failed TV pilot scenes are so disjoint from the patches that he shot to make the final product. It just doesn't feel like something that was designed from the beginning, only hacked together to salvage some failed footage.
I disagree. It feels like a coherent whole.
I find it the opposite. In fact, I would say that knowing that the movie started as a failed pilot enhances the meaning of the movie.
you didn't even spell the fucking title right, which is indicative of your distracted, slap dash thought process.
@@MrTomlette - Mulholland Drive is really is a “love/hate” letter to Hollywood, isn’t it?
It’s pretty enjoyable as an atmospheric film but it’s becomes even more enjoyable once it clicks. The movie is a dream so naturally u just go along with it like as if ur actually dreaming. Then the second time you watching u think what it all means like what we all do when we think back to the dream and why this symbolism is here and there and it’s about a failed actress trying to figure out the many multiple reasons why she didn’t make it Hollywood. The possibility being a more attractive actress slept with the director, the director was having a bad day cuz his wife cheated on him thus ruining his directing performance, an assassin killed the screenwriter, a humanoid cowboy is controlling Hollywood, an old director zoned out to her awesome audition (or in point of view she think she had an awesome audition performance), etc. the possibilities are endless. I think Christopher Nolan’s Tenet forces us to watch in this specific way as well but instead of a nightmare dream it’s time inversion.